User talk:SnowyMeadows/Archive2020 1

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Hello Elephanthunter: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 18:15, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Orphaned non-free image File:Carvana logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Carvana logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:52, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: There are several reasons I've reverted your edit. First, the image does not accurately represent the logo of said company. Second, it appears as though you've replaced the SVG logo with a lower-quality PNG image. To satisfy minimality, non-SVG is not strictly necessary for logos (see Starbucks as an example). Like the non-free template states, it is only necessary that the SVG is rendered at a sufficiently low resolution. Third, it appears as though you tagged a non-free fair-use logo with an OTRS ticket? --Elephanthunter (talk) 14:51, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi. While I am limited in what I'm able to publicly discuss about contents of an OTRS ticket, I can tell you that the OTRS ticket I referenced is the source of the image, and that there is not a permission release in that ticket. The ticket did also include an SVG in the logo's updated color scheme, however that SVG was apparently corrupted and would not upload. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:21, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: You should reveal if you are acting on behalf of the entity the article is about, and why the change is being requested. Companies do not have a right to hide un-revertable edits behind OTRS tickets, and your secrecy here might lead to escalation. I've updated the SVG version of the logo to match the color scheme of the PNG version. --Elephanthunter (talk) 22:56, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Rebecca Zahau

Before reverting please provide actual reliable sources that dispute the coroner's report or Sheriff that have actual standing to make such a judgement. Zahau's family, by accepting the settlement, have vacated any decision against Shacknai's brother. Instituting any legal standing other than the final outcome of the legal process is in violation of an actual living person by suggesting any continued guilt. The only source I can find that is vaguely reliable is sourced solely to the lawyer for Zahau's family and is his opinion - unsupported by any other source. He is a minority legal opinion in an unsuccessful case vacated by a judge after settlement. I have outlined and detailed the sources. Koncorde (talk) 17:35, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

@Koncorde: It appears as though you are adding disputed content to a WP:BLP. This should probably be discussed on the talk page for the relevant article instead of my page. --Elephanthunter (talk) 17:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

No, you are both adding unsupported legal assertions without any sources to support and also making serious BLP changes that directly impact upon an actual living person across multiple articles.

I explained why you were wrong. You have reverted with no evidence to support your position, and you are continuing to do so. Article talk page, or here, doesn't matter. Koncorde (talk) 17:51, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

@Koncorde: There aren't any relevant editors watching my user talk page. I want input from other editors familiar with the topic. I'd appreciate if you discussed this further on the appropriate talk page. Normally this would just be a suggestion per WP:BRD, but as you are adding disputed information to a BLP, it's Wikipedia policy. --Elephanthunter (talk) 18:09, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

JSB edit - Politics section sandbox

Hi Elephanthunter, I posted a message for you in the "Holy day, Article status tag" section some days ago, but you may have missed it, possibly due to how cluttered the page has become, which would be understandable. I will reproduce it here:

(June 8 message) do you have any opinion on the edit in the Sandbox? It's been up for two weeks and I'll add it after the lock ends if we have consensus, as no one has voiced any concerns with it yet.

To give you a brief update:

• The version of the Politics section edit has now been up for over three weeks.
• GSS has continued to not contribute to any discussion regarding this edit, so there have been no objections so far. I think we've been more than patient, and our fortuitous prior timing seems to have ensured that the AISSF section stayed up.
• It is meant to replace sections 3 and 3.1.

Feel free to leave any questions or comments at the end of this section. If you agree with the new version, please leave a brief comment stating your approval, to demonstrate consensus and so I can gauge where everyone is on this topic. So far two users have stated their approval, and none have stated disapproval. Thanks, Sapedder (talk) 09:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Elephanthunter: Change of plans, if you're still inclined to take part: the discussion has moved here if you would like to weigh in and possibly state agreement with the proposed edits. Comments are after every proposed section. The discussion fortunately seems to have gotten a second wind with the help of another admin and other users, so perhaps this round will have conclusive results. Thanks, Sapedder (talk) 09:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)